Education and Training

HC Deb 03 May 1990 vol 171 cc1238-43 5.17 pm

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Patrick Nicholls)

I beg to move, That this House takes note of European Community Documents Nos. 4431/1/90 and the proposal described in the un-numbered Explanatory Memorandum submitted by the Department of Employment on 30th April 1990 relating to the establishment of a European Training Foundation, and 4432/90 and the proposal described in the un-numbered Explanatory Memorandum submitted by the Department of Education and Science on 30th April 1990 relating to the establishment of a Trans European Mobility Programme for University Studies (TEMPUS); and supports the Government's view that these European Community initiatives will provide an appropriate means of providing assistance to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the areas of vocational training, higher education and youth exchanges. The European Council at Strasbourg in December 1989 recognised the importance of training. It called upon the Community to establish a European training foundation for central and eastern Europe. I am sure the House appreciates the reasons for the Heads of States' enthusiasm for the principle of such a foundation.

Countries emerging from the stagnation of central bureaucratic control need help in defining their training needs. We must avoid assistance from the west being fragmented or overlapping. The recipient countries should not be flooded with offers of help in some areas to the possible detriment of others.

The Commission's proposal for the foundation started with Poland and Hungary because the Community's aid package covers only those countries at present. As other central and eastern European countries progress towards democracy, and become covered by the aid package, they may also benefit from the work of the foundation.

The arrangements for extension, as our initial explanatory memorandum and the Scrutiny Committee's reports pointed out, were unclear. We have therefore pursued these concerns in negotiations, with the results described in our latest memoranda. The intention is that the foundation will contribute assistance in initial and continuing vocational training and retraining, including management training.

The foundation works by providing assistance to the eligible countries in the definition of training needs and priorities. It will act as a clearing house to provide information on current initiatives and future needs in the training field, and provide a framework through which offers of assistance can be channelled. On the basis of this information, it will identify, and where necessary develop and support, specific projects in conjunction with member states and private organisations.

The December European Council also asked the Commission to bring forward a proposal for an exchange programme similar in character to those available for Community citizens. This is now known as the trans-European mobility programme for university studies, or TEMPUS to give it its more user-friendly acronym.

TEMPUS acknowledges that it has often been young people in the forefront of the pro-democracy demonstrations. They will also need to be at the forefront of the economic changes. TEMPUS will enable students from central and eastern European countries to study at a university or undertake a university placement within the Community. There will be a small element of exchange, but most traffic is expected to be in the east-west direction. TEMPUS is modelled on the Community's ERASMUS programme, the European Community action scheme for the mobility of university students.

The Community will support activities which link universities and enterprises in central and eastern Europe with partners in the Community, such as retraining of language teachers and the development of short intensive courses and distance learning. That element of the programme is modelled on the Community's community action programme in education and training for technology—the COMETT programme. The likely demand for TEMPUS places within the United Kingdom is not yet known, but there is already much interest in English language training and for courses based in English.

The United Kingdom began negotiations on the foundation and TEMPUS with a number of concerns. These were set out in explanatory memoranda Nos. 4431/90 and 4432/90. In the 12th and 13th reports on the proceedings of the Select Committee on European Legislation, the Government were invited to make available further explanatory memoranda about those issues on which they are seeking clarification in Brussels. These memoranda set out progress to date and deal with the specific points in the Scrutiny Committee reports.

As negotiations have progressed, the links between the proposals to set up the foundation and TEMPUS and the objectives of the European Community treaty have, at our insistence, been made clearer. It is important to remember that the latest presidency text, on which our supplementary memoranda are based, makes it clear that the foundation and TEMPUS are two of the mechanisms by which aid to Poland and Hungary will be achieved. The preambles are based on the preambles already adopted for regulation 3906, which makes clear the Council's view that intensified relationships brought about by such aid will contribute to a harmonious development of economic activities within the Community, and so achieve one of the objectives of the treaty.

I am sure that it will be common ground on both sides of the House that both measures will amount to a worthwhile contribution to the end which we would all share. In that light, I commend them to the House.

5.22 pm

Mr. Derek Fatchett (Leeds, Central)

I thank the Minister for the way in which he has introduced the documents. I agree with his final comment that there is no disagreement on either side of the House about the overall value of the programmes. I agree with many of the Minister's comments this evening, including his commitment to investment in education and skills. I agree also with his comment that, to help central and eastern European economies to develop, it is necessary to develop those skills at all levels. The Minister was right to say that there is a need to develop managerial skills as well as the need to develop what I shall describe as middle-level skills, which are those that apply to technicians and vocational training that are important in terms of economic development.

The Opposition welcome both of the programmes. They are important contributions to the development of eastern Europe and to links between eastern Europe and the European Community. I shall put three specific questions to the Minister about the programmes in the hope that he will be able to answer them. The explanatory memorandum supplied by the Department of Education and Science says in the 10th paragraph on the third page that the flow of students—this point has been made by the Minister this evening—is much more likely to be from east to west. I am, of course, referring to the TEMPUS programme. It is important that British universities, polytechnics and colleges play their full part in the process. We should not be squeezed out of it so as to become second-class contributors to the programme.

The problem highlighted in the 10th paragraph is that students coming from central and eastern European countries would normally be charged full-cost fees. It is important that students are not prevented from participating in the scheme because the British Government charge full-cost fees. I shall welcome the Minister's comments. If we charge full-cost fees, there is a real danger that students from central and eastern Europe will decide to go to Germany, France or other European Community countries and not come to the United Kingdom. It would be a shame if Britain were excluded from TEMPUS on that basis.

When the Minister was talking about the establishment of the European training foundation, he referred to the possibilities for exchange as part of the development of vocational skills. Again, I suspect that the traffic will be mostly one way, from east to west. There may be a good deal of profit in a number of senses for some of that traffic to be from west to east, so that British youngsters and British workers of more mature age have the opportunity to develop certain skills in other countries and building up economic and cultural links on that basis. I hope that the Minister will give some reassurance that it may be possible for British youngsters to participate on that basis and to use the exchange mechanism in that sense to go to either Poland or Hungary.

The Minister rightly said that the two schemes are limited to two eastern European countries, Poland and Hungary. It is clear that there is a need for similar developments and exchanges with other eastern European countries. What criteria will be used when considering whether other countries should become part of the process? It is not unlikely that, before too long, countries such as Czechoslovakia will want to participate. How might they be included in the programme, what criteria will be used, and what are the cost implications of such a development for other countries?

The Opposition approve of the proposals, which build links across Europe. They help in the development of eastern European countries. It is important that the European Community plays its part in that development. On this one occasion we can say to the Minister and his colleagues that we support some of the activities of the European Community. We support the positive way in which they have made a contribution to the schemes.

5.27 pm

Mr. Willian Cash (Stafford)

I think that this is the first time that I have addressed the House when I have been the only Back-Bench Member on either side of the Chamber,. It is important, however, to debate matters that stem from Europe when points of principle are involved.

The Select Committee on European Legislation, of which I am a member, considered the relevant document yesterday. Hon. Members will note that it is dated 2 May 1990. Some hon. Members may have noted the early-day motion which I tabled this morning, which refers to new Treasury memoranda on economic and monetary union. The motion refers to the report of the Commission on that subject and the important memorandum of the Treasury of 23 April, which is available to hon. Members in the Vote Office.

We are discussing an issue which arose during the sitting of the Select Committee on European Legislation yesterday in respect of training and management, which is of immense importance to the people of Europe, including Poland and Hungary, and of especial importance to the future prospects of Britain if it is to catch up with Germany, which now has a 70 per cent. trade surplus with the rest of the European Community put together. That issue is related to the future economy of Europe, including this country. I feel that we should debate economic and monetary union, as well as the issues that are before us, as early as possible. You may not want me to go down that path now, Madam Deputy Speaker, but you may allow me to do so on a future occasion.

There was a time when we were in danger of being somewhat pedantic about the treaty base of EC legislation. This proposal is based on article 235, which deals with proposals for which no explicit powers are set out in the treaty. But there are occasions—this is one of them—when it is clear that, in the interests of a wider Europe, that flexible association of states which, in combination with the EC—I hope that it will not become federal in the sense in which I have described it on many occasions—we can build on matters such as education and training a new, prosperous and freer Europe which will benefit all the people of Europe and bring peace and prosperity to all the people within that common home.

5.30 pm

Mr. Nicholls

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Leeds, Central (Mr. Fatchett) for the way in which he responded to my initial comments. It seems to be one of those days when there is amity throughout the House. Our colleagues in the outside world should be looking to see what we, on both sides of the House, can do when we are left to it.

The hon. Gentleman properly touched on a particular point of concern relating to tuition fees, for which our structures tend to be different from those of our partners in the EC. The Government, in conjunction with EC officials, are considering how to proceed. It would be unrealistic for me to try to work out exactly how that will be resolved, but it would be anomalous if a programme which we thoroughly and wholeheartedly welcome foundered on what is essentially an important point of detail which we must get right. I acknowledge the hon. Gentleman's concern, and the Government are actively considering how to take the idea forward.

Mr. Fatchett

Can the Minister give us the likely time scale of those deliberations? There are clearly implications not just for the TEMPUS programme but in other directions as well. The Minister said that it would be anomalous to favour a programme and then create difficulties in relation to TEMPUS, but presumably other countries with which Britain has certain relationships, particularly bilateral aid relationships, will be looking at the outcome of the deliberations.

I realise that it is not the Minister's direct responsibility, but I hope that he will tell his colleagues in the Department of Education and Science that the decision must be taken within a broader framework. It would be useful if we could have some idea when the deliberations will be completed.

Mr. Nicholls

The hon. Gentleman is right to highlight that point. The Civil Service has a number of helpful phrases, many of which will strike doom into the hearts of hon. Members—words such as "shortly" and "in due course". We want to make progress as soon as possible. This is an outstanding detail—not an issue—which we must resolve, and I shall make sure that the hon. Gentleman's point is drawn to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science. The matter must obviously be dealt with as soon as possible.

The hon. Gentleman also asked for an assurance that an exchange from west to east would be possible. That is an important point which we have taken on board. There is no doubt that the structures allow for that, but, as I understand it, eastern countries feel that they cannot handle large numbers from the west at present. Without dwelling on their difficulties, one can understand the reason for that. It is anticipated that there will be such an exchange, but we must bear in mind the response from the eastern bloc countries.

Finally, the hon. Gentleman asked about extending the programme beyond Poland and Hungary—a point raised by the Scrutiny Committee in its 12th report, when it sought clarification of the procedure to extend the foundation's work beyond Hungary and Poland. It felt that it should reflect the need of the Council of Ministers to control that process.

To some extent, we have tried to reflect the concerns about that in the original explanatory memorandum, because we share the Scrutiny Committee's views. Procedures for extending the work of the foundation beyond Poland and Hungary have been clarified; and that is described in my Department's unnumbered explanatory memorandum of 30 April. They are linked to the council designation of such a country as is eligible for economic aid". That extension would require a further Community legal act, such as that in relation to regulation 3906, which underpins the original package. Progress can clearly be made there. These matters have a momentum of their own.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Cash) reminded us with fast footwork and his customary elegance that there are other matters that he would like to be debating. Were Ito attempt to do so, since my footwork is not as fast as that of my hon. Friend, I suspect that I would be pulled up quickly. I shall simply say that I shall bear in mind what he says. He is right to draw attention to the fact that article 235 underpins this matter and that, to use a polite phrase, as one lawyer to another, it is a catch-all provision to take account of things which might not otherwise be thought of.

Mr. Cash

If I may be allowed to use another language, c'est le blancmanger qui mange-tout.

Mr. Nicholls

I was recently reproached in a Standing Committee for saying in Latin that I did not understand Latin, but that I was prepared to use the vernacular. As I was responding to a Latin tag from another lawyer, I thought that that was appropriate. On that occasion, I was properly reprimanded by the Chair for responding in a foreign language, so I had better not do so today.

Article 235 is there to ensure that there is harmonious economic development and so on. Inevitably, catch-all provisions have to be looked at with some care to make sure they are not catching more than all. However, we can be satisfied that this is a worthwhile initiative to take forward.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved, That this House takes note of European Community Documents Nos. 4431/1/90 and the proposal described in the un-numbered Explanatory Memorandum submitted by the Department of Employment on 30th April 1990 relating to the establishment of a European Training Foundation, and 4432/90 and the proposal described in the un-numbered Explanatory Memorandum submitted by the Department of Education and Science on 30th April 1990 relating to the establishment of a Trans European Mobility Programme for University Studies (TEMPUS); and supports the Government's view that these European Community initiatives will provide an appropriate means of providing assistance to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the areas of vocational training, higher education and youth exchanges.

c1243
1. STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS, &c. 18 words
c1243
1. VALUE ADDED TAX 39 words